Not a member? Sign up now
Median U.S. income drops, pessimism and number of millionaires on the rise
By Alex HeiglOctober 20th, 2011, 4:45 pmComments (27)
Yeah, it sucks that you lost your job, and gee, aren't those Occupy Wall Street protesters just a bunch of hipsters and and drug addicts and such — but come on, man, cheer up! The number of millionaires in the U.S. is rising, even as the U.S. median income drops to its lowest level in over ten years! Aren't you happy for the wealthy?
The median income fell for the second year in a row to $26,364, a one-percent drop from 2009 and the lowest level since 1999. Also, a full twenty percent of adult Americans now classify their financial situation as "poor," the highest percentage since 2001, the first year the survey was enacted.
But, don't worry, you dirty poors. You can briefly turn your sweat-covered faces to the radiant light of the wealthy. (My understanding is that they actually glow.) In fact, the average number of those making a million dollars or more per year actually rose last year to 94,000 last year, up from 78,000 in 2009.
Now, some people may say, "Oh shut your clamoring potato-hole, you wretched dogsbody — that figure merely suggests that more of the hoi polloi are being lifted to the ranks of the mighty. That's 'progress' for you!"
And I guess that would be true, in the unlikely scenario that someone making $20,000 suddenly got promoted to a job paying a cool million or higher. But the top ten percent of earners, and thus those most likely to become millionaires, begins at an income about $165,000 per year, while the bottom ninety percent has a median of around $31,000. That's still a pretty big gap — and one that nicely illustrates the whole "rich get richer while the poor get poorer" argument that's fueling much of the current political climate.
Commentarium (27 Comments)
Probably wouldn't occur to you that some of us who are financially well off worked hard, planned well, invested wisely and earned every fucking dollar that we have. Even when I was a poor, starving
college student, I had the sense to pay a little to get help with my tax returns which helped me come out ahead. I didnt waste it on a lot of the shit that most of the OWS douchebags do. I'll bet that there is a shitload of pot and alcohol being consumed by these poor assholes that can't pay the bills but would never turn off their satellite tv or pass on every new technology that comes out.
I think the whole OWS folks(and their backers, currently more than half the US population according to so-and-so polls) rely on the argument that (misguided)conservative policies enacted by the very Conservative republican President and Congress BEFORE Obama and the Democrats took control 3 years ago rewarded the rich and punished the poor. Their failed leadership has lead this country down this path...so, what "ugh" said, "Comma"....
There's the problem right there: it's always somebody else's fault. You took out a mortgage that was way more than you could afford? Somebody else's fault. Took out $100 k in student loans to major in something that is "you" but for which there aren't jobs or they don't pay for shit? Somebody else's fault. Not willing to give up any Lu dries in life so you can pay for the necessities? Somebody else's fault. Not everybody who is well off are the bankers and asshole politicians. Most of us have planned and prepared and gotten up off our asses. My brother-in-law just lost his house. Not because he lost his job; he didn't. Not because the bank screwed him; it didn't although he blames them for issuing him a mortgage that was sassan beyond his means. All this happened to him because he is an idiot. Not that that stopped him from buying the new iPhone a couple of days ago. There, in the proverbial nutshell, is your typical OWS douchebag. I haven't heard but are the banks failing because everybody is pulling their money? Maybe they should start pooling their money and share it with each other. So fuck you all as well. I plan on spending my weekend on the coast in my beach house and wiping my ass with OWS news articles.
Comma: a lot of us "worked hard." Some of us ended up more successful, financially, than you are or will be. There's a difference between paying for an accountant and saving yourself a few hundred dollars/getting a refund of a few hundred dollars and, say, having your income go from the mid 50K range to 7 figures. You're gloating here because you came out "ahead" to the tune of perhaps 5 grand over the course of four years? Way to cruise right to the top of that millionaire cuddle pile and put all of the "lazy" kids in their places.
Im gloating to the "everyone should share" crowd. I worked hard and I see a large chunk of the protesters that feel like bitching about entitlement rather actually doing something for themselves. And these protests are nothing but a big block party. A few bands and they could call it Woodstock. That damn thing didn't make a difference either.
If more than 50% of the population backs OWS - an absurd notion but one that's often repeated here - then there's no problem for the left: The next election will be result in overwhelming victories for the left. No one seriously expects that to happen though and most give the nod to a Republican candidate for President (although it's close at this point), expect the House to remain in Republican hands and it's possible that the Senate will also be controlled by the GOP.
And, for what it's worth, I don't like Comma's tone but agree with the attitude. I've finally saved a significant amount for retirement and my kids' education but drive a 12 year-old car that I repair myself, live in a nice but in no way ostentatious house and live within my means. I also worked my way through school - opting for a state school and foregoing loans - went to grad school while I worked and have received little from my parents except their love and support, which what I needed and benefited from most.
I'm sure others have worked harder and achieved less. I also thank God I haven't suffered from poor health or any other misfortune.
When the "average" OWS protester can say the same, I'll take them more seriously.
Publius, do you claim to know the "average" OWS protestor? Or are you making these judgements based upon what you hear from pundits on TV? Let's hope your kids can still get jobs after you blow a huge wad on college: There are plenty of people out of work who hold high degrees and have plenty of motivation. By the way, who are you voting for next year and why?
I claim to know the composite views of the OWS protesters, much as they claim to represent 99% of America. I certainly hope my kids can get jobs but time will tell.
Who am I voting for next year for president? I don't know who is running yet, so I don't know. I'd love to see Herman Cain run. I think a Cain/Rubio ticket would be very strong. I'm tired of professional politicians who sincerely believe that there's nothing wrong with America that detailed, intrusive legislation can't fix. I don't think Barney Frank, Chris Dodd or Paul Sarbanes have a clue how much (unintended) damage their landmark work on "financial reform" has done.
I suspect the ticket will be Romney/not sure. If so, I'll likely cast my vote for them but without much enthusiasm.
you keep voting for people who don't give a flying fuck about you, then your children are doomed. I love how you glossed over all the Republican legislation failures within the last 30 years so that you could blame the Democrats for everything. The ugly fact is that the Republicans don't have anyone who can stand up to Obama in 2012. The Republican candidacy is a complete joke...the irony is that people like you are the punchline. Btw, Romney IS "not sure". He should nominate his flip/flopped alter ego for Vice President!
In 2008, I voted for the candidate that I thought the country, and subsequently, I would do best by. Nonetheless, Obama was elected. I hoped for the best but have been, predictably, disappointed. He may or may not "give a flying f!@#" about me but I'm not doing as well as I'd hoped and, looking around, my neighbors are not faring all that well either. I assess the reason for the failures to be twofold: 1. A flawed governing philosophy, and, 2. A lack of experience. Not distinct, certainly, but a recipe for the disaster we see unfolding around us. I was amazed to see the President brag - admittedly somewhat subtly - that we will likely avoid a double dip recession. 1000 days into the administration and we seem stuck with tepid job growth and general malaise. Blame Obama, Bush, the global economy or whoever you want but my vote will be to hire someone who can fix the problem, not someone who will work hard trying to fix it.
I don't care much for either the Republican or Democrat record over the past fifty years. We have consistently been living beyond our means, we've centralized power in DC and look to the same idiots who cause the problems for our salvation.
By "not sure" I was indicating that I'm not sure who Romney's running mate would be. I do think MR is the likely nominee. I'm not sure who he would like to have his running mate or who is willing. I suspect the desired VP nominee will represent a diversity pick but doubt that Cain would accept.
(error added to feed the spelling and grammar troll)
Publius, it seems, given your line of reasoning here, you should check out the statistics on which recent precedents have done more to increase our national debt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms George W. Bush did far more than any of the others.
(And by precedents I of course meant presidents. Although the former also has a kernel of relevancy.)
@nn - It's true that in the eight years (2001-2009) referenced the debt was increased more than the first two Obama years but if you normalize to a four year term, Obama's deficits/contribution to the debt are larger. Obama is looking at approx $7T/four year term which is far and away more than the worst Bush term of $4.5T.
It's largely a pointless argument, though. Bush was bankrupting us more slowly than Obama but bankrupting us all the same. If the alternatives are Bush's policies or Obama's, we're screwed.
Comma, don't bring us down to your level. We don't associate with conservatrolls.
As if you'd know if I did, conservatroll. You can't troll without a target!
I'm sorry, did you just find command V? Failed conservatrolling...
@nn - Any comment?
I don't think anyone is really qualified to say "the OWS protestors are THIS way" or "the OWS protestors fit into THIS category." I mean, how can you even begin to say that you have any idea what these people are like? How many of them have you talked to?
The best thing about the OWS protest is that it seems to be made up of damn near every demographic imaginable - from lazy, pot-smoking trust fund kids (and I'm sure there are plenty of them, as the right-wing has alleged) to honest, hard-working individuals who gave everything and got nothing in return.
That last group there - that's the real heart and soul of OWS and they are the reason it's gotten as big as it has. There aren't enough lazy hippies in the world to create and sustain a protest like OWS - it takes all kinds, and it sounds like all kinds are there in NYC right now. You've got teachers, veterans, retirees - hell, I even heard that some of the employees of the Wall Street firms that are being protested against are behind them.
How many have I talked to? You ended by saying that you had "heard" about who is protesting. All of the other groups that have joined the block party could give a shit about the original protest; they just want to push their own agenda that likely has nothing to do with the banks or Wall St. There aren't enough lazy hippies in the world? Look at the film. They are MOSTLY dirty hippies. They don't even have a central theme. It's just a big party that they can look back on and tell people about so that they sound edgy and convince themselves that they made a difference. They aren't. Don't believe me? The only thing that will change come election day is that socialist assholes in Washington will be sent packing. The hippies will be too baked to remember to vote.
A vast majority of the OWS protestors, quite frankly, don't have a clue what they're protesting. They see the world falling to pieces and are trying to find out why. They have been told that its the 'greedy bankers' and 'millionaires' fault, by the current administration. But isn't often those who point the fingers are often the ones to blame? If any of the protestors looked the past rhetoric and political spin, they would be able to see that this apparent hopelessness is only the result of laws passed by the real enemies, the greedy, self serving politicians.
I hate you, and everything you stand for.
That's a Bingo!
I am beatgeneration1.
I fail to see what you're claiming regarding the current Administration telling "the people" to blame bankers. Quite to the contrary, I think most of the protesters are angry with both politicians and corporations, who tend to cooperate a lot (goes for Democrats and Republicans). Systematic change, I believe, is the term for what they're hoping to eventually achieve. It won't happen in a month. But over the course of several years who knows what could happen.
You can argue till your blue in the face but these OWSers don't listen. They are from a generation taught that they are important and their opinion matters. It is the Me, Me, Me generation. They spew half baked ideas all the while blaming someone else for there problems. No I don't know any OWSers personally but I know a couple of people who agree with them. There idea of looking for jobs is picking up an application twice a month. Then they go out and spend their wives or parents money on games and cell phones. Meanwhile I am working six days a week and trying to get ahead. Lastly what the OWSers don't realize is this little stunt means nothing, all they are going to get from this time is some memories.
I suspect the dynamic might be similar to the anti-war protesters in 1968 and 1972. Widespread popular support was claimed in each case. Both presidential elections went solidly for the right.
to Publius to rewrite history to nullify the influence of protestors in the 60's and 70's.